Trump’s “Nazi Problem” Just Got Worse, New Leaked Texts Expose A Lot
PDS Published 10/21/2025
-
The nominee meant to protect whistleblowers and victims of discrimination may have just blown up his own career - one racist text at a time.
Right, this is Paul Ingrassia (In-grah-see-uh) and back in June, Trump nominated him to run the Office of Special Counsel.
Which is the agency meant to investigate federal employee whistleblower complaints, discrimination claims, and other sensitive work.
But it seems like he may not be the best guy for that job - if his text messages revealed by Politico are anything to go on.
Right, Politico just released this bombshell article detailing some of the messages between In-grah-see-uh and roughly 6 other Republican operatives and influencers.
With some of the highlights including a conversation from January of 2024 - in which In-grah-see-uh wrote,
“MLK Jr. was the 1960s George Floyd and his ‘holiday’ should be ended and tossed into the seventh circle of hell where it belongs.” []
Barely a month later, he followed that up with,
“We need competent white men in positions of leadership… The founding fathers were wrong that all men are created equal … We need to reject that part of our heritage.”
And he doubled down on that in a later exchange in May - where he was talking to an unnamed Trump campaign staffer who was working on outreach to minority voters.
With Politico saying In-grah-see-uh suggested the staffer didn’t show enough deference to the Founding Fathers being white.
Which prompted someone else to say,
“Paul belongs in the Hitler Youth with… Steve Bannon.”
To which In-grah-see-uh responded,
“I do have a Nazi streak in me from time to time, I will admit it.”
When he was met with pushback there, In-grah-see-uh dug his heels in - saying,
“We should celebrate white men and western civilization and I will never back down from that.”
And he loudly maintained that despite several members of the chat telling him to pull it back and that he was coming across, quote, “with a tinge of racism.”
All of that is just the tip of the iceberg on this chat - In-grah-see-uh also had some explicitly racist comments against people from China and India and Africa.
But soon after that conversation in May, the group chat disbanded - reportedly because the other members were tired of In-grah-see-uh’s rhetoric.
Now, Politico says they obtained these messages from someone else in the chat who saved them - sharing them on the condition of anonymity.
And adding that they felt like they had to do so because they don’t think In-grah-see-uh’s qualified for the position he’s up for - saying,
“He was too young and too inexperienced to deal with the fame. It was like giving an 18-year-old $10 million and saying, ‘Have at it, kid.’”
It’s also important to note that Politico corroborated the messages with another person in the chat as well verified the number associated with In-grah-see-uh in the chat actually belongs to him.
Which prompted his attorney immediately trying to do damage control - suggesting that the messages may be fake before adding,
“However … even if the texts are authentic, they clearly read as self-deprecating and satirical humor making fun of the fact that liberals outlandishly and routinely call MAGA supporters ‘Nazis,’”
“In reality, Mr. Ingrassia has incredible support from the Jewish community because Jews know that Mr. Ingrassia is the furthest thing from a Nazi.”
Though, within days, the attorney shifted gears and was doubling down on the claim that the messages aren’t real - with another statement saying,
“In this age of AI, authentication of allegedly leaked messages, which could be outright falsehoods, doctored, or manipulated, or lacking critical context, is extremely difficult.”
“We do not concede the authenticity of any of these purported messages.”
It’s also worth noting that this is absolutely not Ingrassia’s first scandal by any means.
In fact, earlier this month, it was reported that he was the subject of an internal investigation at the Department of Homeland Security - where he currently works as White House liaison - after a sexual harassment complaint was filed against him.
Though the woman who made the complaint quickly withdrew it and said that nothing happened.
Then there’s the fact that his nomination hearing was delayed by the GOP-led Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
With some senators expressing concerns about In-grah-see-uh’s previous antisemetic comments as well as his connections to Nick Fuentes and Andrew Tate.
So all that, combined with messages revealed by Politico, has put Ingrassia’s nomination in serious jeopardy.
Right, because In-grah-see-uh’s nomination hearing is set for this Thursday.
But we saw House Democrats urging Trump to withdraw the nomination and remove him from the federal government.
With Representatives Bennie Thompson and Robert Garcia writing,
“Mr. Ingrassia’s misconduct renders his continued employment as a White House liaison to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) dangerous for women, and his proposed promotion to serve as Special Counsel demeans the office and is insulting to the American people.”
And Thompson added in a separate statement,
“It’s shameful that someone under investigation for harassment—and now exposed for sending racist messages—would be rewarded with a promotion. President Trump must immediately withdraw his nomination and remove him from government service.”
But it isn’t just Democrats taking a stand against him - we’ve also seen at least 4 Republican senators, including Senate Majority Leader John Thune, saying that they will not be supporting In-grah-see-uh’s nomination.
With Thune saying that he hopes the White House pulls the nomination entirely but even if they don’t, quote, “He’s not going to pass.”
Right, because just 4 Republicans voting against him with the entire Democratic caucus would kill his nomination.
Though other Republicans have been less quick to offer a definite “no” - with Rand Paul saying,
“We’re going to wait and hear from [the White House], what their thoughts are, whether they’ve talked to all the Republican members, and whether they think they have the votes.”
And Senator Josh Hawley added,
“I’m sure we will welcome the opportunity to have his hearing on Thursday and respond to folks’ questions.”
As for whether or not the nomination will be withdrawn, we don’t have anything yet.
We haven’t seen a comment from Trump or Vance on that front.
So we’ll just have to wait and see how things play out between now and Thursday,
In the meantime, I would love to hear your thoughts about this whole thing in those comments down below.
-
And then, let’s talk about the trial over CharlieKirk’s assassination, and the bill it is already racking up.
Right, the trial will take place in Utah County, Utah, and the Wall Street Journal just did a piece about how it is a quiet area not used to getting national attention, let alone the frenzy that comes with a high profile assassination.
And the costs associated with it are also a big issue.
Right, you had officials telling the outlet that they have spent the last few weeks scrambling to come up with the $5 million they believe the trial will require, which is over 3% of the county’s entire general operating fund.
With one of the elected county commissioners telling the Journal:
“We are looking under the proverbial couch cushions.”
“For two weeks I could hardly eat or sleep because I was so worried about where we were going to find these resources. Neither the accused perpetrator nor the victim were residents of my county, so it’s crazy that we’re this stressed.”
As for what costs are associated with a trial of this nature, well, you have a defense team, new hires at the prosecutor’s office, police overtime, and safety measures like a SWAT team and armored vehicles to transport the suspect, Tyler Robinson.
But not everyone is happy that these funds are being used in this way, right, some people in Utah county don’t want their taxpayer dollars going to some major defense team for the alleged assassin.
And last week, you also had the Salt Lake Tribune reporting that the county is spending more on Robinson’s defense team than on other death penalty cases.
Right, apparently his attorneys are being paid $275 an hour, while the ones representing the county’s other two suspects facing a potential death penalty are making $225 an hour.
On top of that, the county has also reportedly agreed to cover security for the team’s court appearances, at around $40 an hour.
But you did have a spokesperson for the county defending this pay gap, saying:
“We knew from the outset that the Robinson case is going to require much more work than a typical case when it comes to evidence, media attention, public scrutiny and more. That’s reflected in the rate. Knowing that the Robinson case was extraordinary going into it, we worked on that language ahead of time.”
The Wall Street Journal noting that the PR element was the biggest hurdle to clear when finding a firm willing to take his case in the first place. []
With that county commissioner also arguing that these efforts are well worth it, saying:
“It’s the best use of taxpayer dollars to ensure that he had good competent defense the first time so that we don’t have to go to retrials because of rookie mistakes.”
Right, because what’s more expensive than one high profile trial? Well, two high profile trials.
So I would love to know your thoughts on that, but this is also not even the only story associated with funds covering events tied to Charlie Kirk.
Right, TMZ just obtained documents showing that secret service allegedly paid $2.6 million to secure the arena his memorial was held at in Arizona.
Apparently paying that sum to ARCUS Group, an event management company, so they could secure the perimeter as both the President and Vice President attended, as did other high profile figures like Elon Musk.
Right now, as for where this case overall stands, Tyler Robinson is expected to make his next court appearance next week, so we will have to see what comes of that.
As well as with all the many other parts of this story that are still playing out.
Get 50% off 1 month of Trade at Trade Coffee
-
Republicans in North Carolina’s Senate officially voted this morning to change their congressional districts for daddy Trump.
Debate on the new map officially only happened for a single day in the state legislature --
although it’s clearly been happening longer than that behind the scenes because even we’ve talked about it on the show.
The new map will likely target the district held by Rep. Don Davis -- a Democrat and one of three Black members of Congress from North Carolina.
It’ll also likely mean that outside of a miracle at the polls, Republicans will control 11 out of 14 US House seats from North Carolina.
Republicans in the state, and across the US, used to argue that these new Congressional maps “better represent” the will of the voters since Trump won a “mandate” in the 2024 election.
However for many reasons that’s not the case.
For example, in North Carolina Trump barely won 50% of the vote in 2024,
But his party will now control about 78% of the state’s House Seats.
And lawmakers there just took the mask off completely, saying:
“The motivation behind this redraw is simple and singular. Draw a new map that will bring a single Republican seat to the North Carolina Congressional Delegation. Republicans hold a razor-thin margin in the United States House of Representatives. And if Democrats flip four seats in the upcoming midterm elections they will take control of the House and torpedo President Trump’s agenda.” [entire video]
From here, the plan goes to the state House, which is expected to pass it without issue and then it goes to Democratic Governor Josh Stein’s desk.
You might think that because Stein is a Democrat that he’ll be able to just veto the thing and problem solved.
However he actually doesn’t have the power in this situation, so he’ll essentially be forced to sign it.
That being said, without a doubt there’s going to be a lot of lawsuits related to this situation, so this will not be the last we hear about it.[]
As we know, North Carolina is just the latest move in this mass-state Redistricting fight.
Red states are moving to change the maps in order to give Trump an easier time in the 2025 midterms while many big Blue states are doing the same in order to maintain some sense of balance.
Because if they don’t do it in response out of some obligation to maintain political norms, they’re going to be left in the dust.
So Trump’s and Texas -- the first state to do this -- are completely upending out elections and it’s just flying past us.
During any other administration this would be massive, earth shattering news.
I’ll say that when we cover stories like this in other counties -- you know, groups subverting political norms and doing anything they can to cling onto power -- it’s usually because things are going downhill… fast.
-
If you live in Georgia or know people who do, listen up, because you could have a very real chance to help determine the outcome of a SUPER important election.
An election that has MASSIVE implications for the entire state, but one that very few people traditionally vote in — and that’s exactly how the powers that be want to keep it.
Right, and specifically, I’m talking about a special election for two members of Georgia’s Public Service Commission.
And if your eyes immediately glazed over when you heard the words “Public Service Commission,” that’s totally understandable but also what they're counting on.
But grab something caffeinated and lock in, because I promise this will be worth your time.
Even if you don’t live in Georgia, this is an important topic to know about, and it could inform future elections that you may also vote in.
Okay, so in order to understand why these two races are so important, you need to know what a Public Service Commission — or PSC — actually does.
Stay awake! I’ll make this as fast as possible — though if you do want to dive into it more, Hank Green has a great video that I’ll link down below.
So, at the very top level, a PSC is a state-level government agency that regulates essential public utilities like electricity, gas, and water.
Sometimes, they have different names, like a Public Utilities Commission, but every state has some version of this.
So why do we need these agencies? Well, it’s because most public utilities are natural monopolies.
And while we normally think monopoly = bad, this is actually in the public interest.
Right, energy utilities — like, for example, power companies — they require TONS of infrastructure that costs billions of dollars to build and operate.
Just think about all the different power lines, plants, substations, control systems.
So it’s WAY more efficient and cost-effective for everyone to just have one system.
But in order to keep utility monopolies from doing the bad shit that monopolies can do, you need some kind of regulator to protect the public — that’s where PSCs come in.
Right, PSCs do it all: they approve how much energy utilities can charge their customers, ensure safety and reliability, and implement renewable energy projects and efficiency programs to save power.
They also greenlight infrastructure projects like new power plants and set rates for how much money utilities are allowed to make from their investments in those projects.
So, in other words, these are INCREDIBLY powerful agencies that shape energy and environmental policy in each state and oversee a multi-billion dollar market.
Now, notably, these commissions also vary dramatically from state to state.
Right, they range in size from three to seven seats, and in the vast majority of states, those seats are nonpartisan and filled by the governor or legislature.
But there are 10 states that allow voters to elect their commissioners, and all of those elections are partisan, meaning candidates run as Democrats or Republicans.
So in Georgia specifically, there are five partisan commissioners who are elected by voters to serve six-year terms.
And the reason Georgia is having this special election right now is actually really important background here, because it stems from a lawsuit that challenged the process the state uses to elect its commissioners.
Right, each of the five commissioners represents a different district in the state, but when one of them goes up for election, EVERYONE votes in a statewide election — not just the district they represent.
And that also helps explain why all five of the current commissioners are Republicans, even though Georgia is a purple state with some large blue cities like Atlanta.
So, in 2020, a group of Black voters filed a lawsuit arguing that the statewide elections diluted their voting power and denied them the ability to pick a candidate of their choice.
And that resulted in YEARS of ongoing legal back-and-forth that we won’t get into.
But all you need to know right now is that, because of the litigation, Georgia’s Republican Secretary of State canceled the PSC elections in 2022 and 2024.
Then, last year, Republican Gov. Brian Kemp signed a law resetting the schedule for all PSC elections and allowing all the Republican commissioners to stay in their seats well after their terms expired.
So, as a result, there are two PSC elections this year: one for the seat in District 2, which covers the eastern part of the state, including Athens and Savannah.
And the other is for District 3, which contains much of the Atlanta metro area.
But Republican lawmakers have also gotten backlash for planning these races outside of a usual election year.
Right, turnout is already traditionally low for PSC races nationally because these commissions are so technical and bureaucratic, and very few people know what they actually do or why they’re so important.
But turnout is even LOWER when there aren’t other major races on the ballot driving out voters.
And that's part of the reason I’m bringing these special elections to your attention: right, these races could be easily swayed if a few thousand more people vote — maybe even just a few hundred.
I mean, hell, turnout for the PSC primaries was literally just 2.8% of ALL the 7.4 million active voters in the ENTIRE state of Georgia.
But these elections are incredibly important and have SUPER high stakes for a number of reasons.
Right, over the last few years, the Republican-controlled PSC has implemented several controversial moves that critics say prioritize the financial benefits of energy companies over consumer interests.
But one of the biggest sticking points has been the major rate increases on customers.
Right, according to reports, the PSC approved requests by Georgia Power — the state’s largest energy provider — to increase rates SIX TIMES just in the last two years, citing increased costs of fuel and electricity driven by inflation.
But, all in all, those price hikes have increased average customer rates by $43 more per month — or $516 more each year — compared to just two years ago.
And, what’s more, the PSC also increased the amount of money that energy utilities can make from their investments in new projects.
Driving up their rate of return to nearly 12% — higher than the roughly 8-10% that is standard across the country.
And that’s also significant because it increases incentives for energy companies to build more infrastructure — right, the more they invest in new building projects, the more money they get in return from their investments.
That might be a good incentive to have when more infrastructure is needed, but it also creates a world where utilities WANT to build more, even when it’s not really necessary.
Now, that said, plenty of new builds ARE needed to revitalize infrastructure and keep up with new demand.
But when the PSC approves those builds, it can create decades of higher prices for consumers who help cover those costs.
Which is why it’s so important to have a PSC that only approves necessary projects and keeps the corporate interests in check.
But there are major concerns that Georgia’s Republican commissioners are not doing enough to regulate energy companies amid the ongoing AI boom.
Right, Georgia has already become one of the leading states for new construction of AI datacenters, which require a metric fuckton of energy.
And in order to meet that demand, new energy infrastructure needs to be built by the energy utilities — who, of course, profit from those builds.
So AI datacenters are a major cash cow for utilities, period.
But experts also say the datacenter boom could also be a great excuse for utilities to overestimate the amount of infrastructure they actually need, so they can overbuild and make more money.
Now, notably here, the Georgia PSC and major utilities have said they won’t let residential consumers pay the increased costs of new datacenter infrastructure.
But many advocates are highly skeptical of that, claiming that the commissioners aren’t actually doing their jobs, and accusing them of doing whatever the utilities want instead of pushing back against expensive builds or overly optimistic growth forecasts.
And alleging that they have not implemented proper safeguards to protect consumers already grappling with increased rates from the high costs of datacenter builds.
So these elections are a chance to break up a commission that many feel is not acting in the best interest of the people it represents.
As well as to balance the power of the all-Republican PSC to better reflect the views of a purple state.
Right, for example, in District 2, the Republican incumbent Tim Echols (Eckles) is being challenged by Democrat Alicia Johnson, who has criticized the PSCs’ rate increases and demanded more accountability for data centers.
And in District 3, Commissioner Fitz Johnson is facing off against Peter Hubbard, a Democrat who also claims PSC hasn’t done enough to keep bills down or protect customers from data center costs.
And if you want to know more about the candidates, I’ll make sure to link to some resources in the description.
But, as far as what happens next, early voting has already begun and will go until Halloween, and the actual Election Day is on Tuesday, November 4th.
And I’ll also make sure to provide voting resources as well.
But I want to end this by saying, if you vote in Georgia, please cast your ballot in this incredibly important election and share this video with other folks in your community.
And for those of you who don’t live in Georgia, send it to people you know in the state, post it on your socials, and do some research into your state’s Public Service Commission to see how things are done where you live.
Use code DEFRANCO at Incogni to get an exclusive 60% off.
-
A federal court just handed Donald Trump a massive win.
With a 2-1 ruling from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals claiming “it is likely that [he] lawfully exercised his statutory authority” when hefederalized Oregon’s National Guard to send them into what he called “War-Ravaged Portland.” []
And with this decision, they’re overturning a temporary restraining order put in place by a lower court judge appointed by Trump.
But that judge? She actually issued two orders blocking the mobilization of federal troops to Portland.
The first blocked his activation of the Oregon National Guard.
The second came after Trump tried to get around the first order by sending in troops from California – blocking him from sending any state’s National Guard to Oregon.
And since the second order is still technically in place troops can’t immediately be mobilized.
But the administration has argued that it should also be overruled because both lower court orders relied on the same legal reasoning.
With that reasoning being that Trump’s determination that the situation in Portland required a federal military response was, quote, “simply untethered to the facts.” []
Right, the administration had argued troops were needed because immigration “
And of course, you had Trump writing in his social media post announcing the deployment that they were needed "to protect War ravaged Portland, and any of our ICE Facilities under siege from attack by Antifa, and other domestic terrorists.”
But – according to local and state officials, residents of Portland, and journalists on the ground – Trump’s characterization was outright false.
Right, because while protests there have sometimes gotten rowdy – with police making several arrests and at one point in the summer even declaring a riot – they’ve also been very small, isolated, and handled by law enforcement.
With even the assistant police chief confirming in a declaration to the court that protests have never been so out of control that local officers couldn't respond, writing:
"...on any given weekend, the nightlife in Portland's entertainment district has warranted greater…resources than the small, nightly protests in front of the ICE facility." []
And with that, you also had the judge who initially blocked the deployment in September noting in her decision that “it had been months since there was any sustained level of violent or disruptive protest activity.”
But two of the judges (1, 2) on the appeals court panel – also appointed by Trump – argued that the first judge “accorded no deference to the President’s determination that he could not execute federal laws with regular forces.” []
Saying she “substituted [her] own assessment of the facts for the President’s assessment of the facts. []
And claiming that she “discounted the violent and disruptive events that occurred in June, July, and August, including the resulting closure of the ICE facility for over three weeks in June and July.” []
Although, notably, that closure? While the Justice Department claimed the facility had become “inoperable” thanks to the protests, you’ve had Oregon Public Broadcasting looking at the data.
And finding that “the assertion that the building has been out of commission is inaccurate” – adding:
“During the three weeks in question, ICE officers booked 25 people into the Portland facility.” []
But maybe even more notably, you’ve had the third judge on the appeals court panel – who was appointed by Bill Clinton – absolutely slamming her colleagues’ arguments, writing:
“It is illogical to assert that, because an emergency existed three months ago, the same emergency exists today.”
“A pot of tepid water is not a pot of boiling water, and it cannot hurt you, even if it was boiling three hours earlier.” []
And with that, you also had her saying that:
"Given Portland protesters’ well-known penchant for wearing chicken suits, inflatable frog costumes, or nothing at all when expressing their disagreement with the methods employed by ICE, observers may be tempted to view the majority’s ruling, which accepts the government’s characterization of Portland as a war zone, as merely absurd."
“Buttoday’s decision is not merely absurd. It erodes core constitutional principles, including sovereign States’ control over their States’ militias and the people’s First Amendment rights to assemble and to object to the government’s policies and actions.” []
And so to wrap up, you also had her urging her colleagues “to act swiftly to vacate the majority’s order before the illegal deployment of troops under false pretenses can occur.” []
And what she’s talking about there is how a larger panel of 11 appellate judges could potentially reconsider the case and give a no decision.
You also had Oregon’s Attorney General pushing for that – saying in a statement:
“Today’s ruling, if allowed to stand, would give the president unilateral power to put Oregon soldiers on our streets with almost no justification” – and adding:
"We are on a dangerous path in America."
But far as the Trump administration? It has, of course, praised the ruling – with a spokesperson saying:
“This ruling reaffirms that the lower court’s ruling was unlawful and incorrect.”
And so we’ll have to see where this case ultimately ends up – but also all these other similar cases that are underway or may be in the future.
Last week, for example, a federal appeals court actually upheld a lower court’s ruling temporarily blocking Trump’s federalization and deployment of the National Guard deployment in Chicago.
In Tennessee, a group of seven elected officials have sued the governor and the state’s attorney general for allowing the deployment of Tennessee National Guard to Memphis.
And now Trump is eying San Francisco as his next target – again, against the wishes of state and local officials – so another legal battle may soon be starting there.
-
Trump is literally demolishing the White House.
*And I don’t mean this in a symbolic sense like “oh, Trump is ruining Democracy!”
No, he’s actually tearing down the East Wing of the White House.
Why, you ask? Well, so he can build a $250 million grand ballroom, of course! Duh!
Right, yesterday, construction teams officially began demolishing a portion of the East Wing, which has traditionally been used by the first lady and her team.
And if you’re a person who reads into things… I’d love to know what you think that says about Melania Trump and her role in the White House…
With Trump also announcing the groundbreaking in a post on Truth Social, where he claimed that:
“For more than 150 years, every President has dreamt about having a Ballroom at the White House to accommodate people for grand parties, State Visits, etc.”[]
But that’s also coming from the same man who said he repeatedly offered to build a ballroom in the White House while Obama and Biden were in office, but both administrations turned him down.
But, regardless, we’ve seen many people stunned to see Trump tearing down such a big part of American history and symbolism in D.C.
Especially because, literally just three months ago, Trump said this:
“It'll be built over on the east side, and it will be beautiful. It'll have views of the Washington Monument. It won’t interfere with the current building. It won’t be. It’ll be near it but not touching it — and pays total respect to the existing building, which I’m the biggest fan of/ It’s my favorite. It’s my favorite place. I love it.” 22:27 - 22:47
Yeah… that was at the end of July… just for whatever it’s worth.
But yeah, can’t wait to see all the great shit Trump gets up to in his new ballroom! I’m sure it will be filled with all the best people, like Trump’s memecoin holders, or anyone else who wants to cozy up to him.
I mean, hell, there are already concerns about how this ballroom is being paid for.
Right, the funding has come from dozens of major companies like Apple, Amazon, Lockheed Martin, Coinbase, and more.
Raising concerns among ethics experts who warn that this is yet another way for people to buy access — and influence — with Trump.
What a fun time to be alive!
